Neil Delima wrote:
>- Test cases for attributes Text.isElementContentWhitespace and Attr.isId,
>when transformed to java, appear to get inappropriately prefixed with a
>"get". Is there a fix for this?
>
>
>
No, but I knew that this would need to be added since this was a change
to the production rules. The plan was to add a test and then fix the
production.
>- Does the test framework support testing methods that either return
>UserDataObject's or accept UserDataObject parameters.
> For example to test getParameter(...) is something like following valid?
>
><var name="doc" type="Document"/>
><var name="domConfig" type="DOMConfiguration"/>
><var name="param" type="Booelan"/> <!-- might case validation errors -->
><load var="doc" href="staffNS" willBeModified="false"/>
><domConfig obj="doc" var="domConfig" interface="Document"/>
><getParameter obj="domConfig" var="param" name='"comments"'/>
><assertEquals actual="param" expected='Boolean.TRUE' id="blah"/> <!--
>again possible validation errors -->
>
>
>
Boolean.TRUE is way too much of a Java-ism. Write it as expected="true"
and I'll make sure the transform and infrastructure do the right thing.
>- Is there any way of specifying more than one acceptable expected
>exception on a method?
>
>
>
There is no construct currently to do this. If really necessary, we can
add one. Maybe something like:
<assertDOMException>
<AllowableCodes>
<INDEX_SIZE_ERR/>
<NO_MODIFICATION_ERR/>
</AllowableCodes>
<someStatement/>
</assertDOMException>
Do you have any plans to commit these tests?